Classes or classless, which system is better in RPGs?

[Glop_dweller]

... where choosing one archetype means constraining yourself to a certain set of abilities and excluding everything else.

And yet this is the core foundation of Roleplaying; the very point & purpose of the activity.

 

[Darth Canoli]

I really like both systems as long as they're well executed.

Still, sometimes, i really miss UFO system where not all recruits are equal, just like IRL, some people are dumb and couldn't run five kilometers to save their lives where others are not only extremely smart but can excel in any sport or even nearly every activity.

I would really like to have a party based cRPG reflecting that, a mix between UFO and some classic cRPG where you can switch team members at will and some are lame and some others overpowered, some could have overpowered classes, some multi-classes without drawbacks. (And also far more complex and complete than Battle Brothers)

Also reminds me of the Shining Force series.

It would be nice to get something like that with a more complex system than these two, like ToEE/KotC meets Shining Force/UFO.

 

[a100167]

I would say it depends entirely on the type of RPG. If you have a party based game, it's best in my opinion that they use classes. Having everyone classed out for a specific task is half the fun. Games were you have no direct control over your party members like Fallout of Arcanum are different and they benefit well from a classless structure I think.

 

[rogueknight333]

I like the concept of classless systems but am often disappointed by them in practice. While in theory they allow players more freedom to design a character that exactly fits their role-playing concept or is not one of the usual boring archetypes, too often what actually happens with them is the exact opposite: all characters end up being more or less the same either because it is possible to become a master of all trades or because certain skills or builds are so clearly superior to the alternatives there is no good reason to bother with anything else. Even in the better designed versions, instead of having special content for a wide range of classes, one often only gets several paths for a handful of very broad archetypes (here's an option for combat-focused characters, one for stealthy characters, another for diplomatic characters...and I guess that's it). Ultimately of course it comes down to the details of how they are implemented, but classless systems tend to put a greater burden on the designers of the game to actually know what they are doing.

So it seems that class systems tend to be easier for the developer: with clearly defined classes it is easier to balance them, set up encounters with an appropriate level of challenge for them, set up reactive features to the game that benefit particular classes and not others, etc. (you more or less know what capabilities the player will be able to deploy and can design around them), while classless systems tend to be easier for players: easier to break the game and do anything you want. I am not sure it always works this way though. I think one of the reasons classless systems tend to be preferred for single-character games is precisely because that makes things easier on the developers. Having rigid classes in games of that type would require that there be a viable path to completion for every class, and ideally something that makes the path for each class interesting and distinctive. Like a good classless system, that would be great if one could pull it off, but is very hard to pull off: easier to just give every character access to any skill that might be needed.

 

[mondblut]

... where choosing one archetype means constraining yourself to a certain set of abilities and excluding everything else.

And yet this is the core foundation of Roleplaying; the very point & purpose of the activity.

The purpose of the activity is efficiently killing shit for xp.

No sane player is going to gimp himself and rob himself of content and options: ergo, yay to identical jack of all trades who can use all equipment, cast all spells and dabble in thieving and fasttalking when needed. Expecting anything less is the same as expecting someone to make a party of all fighters in party-based RPG.

 

[RNGsus]

I want to know going in what skills play off each other, which is what classes are for.

 

[TigerKnee]

There's quite a few people who believe that classes favor party-focused games more while classless favors single-character, but I feel like it's more that classless benefits games with strongly developed non-combat mechanics more than class-based ones.

Maybe it's just something about the way combat typically plays out that makes things boil down to the most effective strategies generally being how you would end up designing a preset class anyway.

Is there a single "create your party" RPG that has developed non-combat mechanics of any worth

 

[Xunwael]

Like classes for their strong themes and aesthetics.

Like classless for the versatility and freedom they afford.

Worst of both worlds: Multi-classing. The shit aesthetics of classless with the obnoxious restrictions of classes. PoE being perhaps the best example. Muslewizards and faithless paladins. An abomination, I tell you.

 

[Max Damage]

TES hasn't had real classes since Arena. Either way, classes always seem too arbitrary, I am honestly surprised they are still a thing in RPGs because they go against the concept of roleplaying big time. Mechanics - wise, roles/abilities don't imply whole "class/ability package" by default. And classless system can emulate classes with ease, if the need somehow arises, while the opposite isn't true (multiclassing is often very restrictive and clunky). Classless system is always better, regardless of context (unless the designer isn't very bright, but same goes for everything).

 

[biggestboss]

And classless system can emulate classes with ease, if the need somehow arises, while the opposite isn't true (multiclassing is often very restrictive and clunky). Classless system is always better, regardless of context (unless the designer isn't very bright, but same goes for everything).

’

This is exactly how I feel about it. EX: The new Shadowrun games are mechanically classless, but give the illusion of classes during chargen by allowing the choice of presets like Street Samurai, Decker, etc. - class-like descriptors that allocate points into the classless system to emulate what a class would normally do.

 

[buffalo bill]

classy is nice, but sometimes you want someone who is down for anything

 

[JarlFrank]

And classless system can emulate classes with ease, if the need somehow arises, while the opposite isn't true (multiclassing is often very restrictive and clunky). Classless system is always better, regardless of context (unless the designer isn't very bright, but same goes for everything).

’

This is exactly how I feel about it. EX: The new Shadowrun games are mechanically classless, but give the illusion of classes during chargen by allowing the choice of presets like Street Samurai, Decker, etc. - class-like descriptors that allocate points into the classless system to emulate what a class would normally do.

Shadowrun's classless system is a pretty good example of how classless doesn't mean you'll become a jack of all trades.

Playing a decker + mage hybrid doesn't make any sense because cyber implants reduce your magical effectiveness. You can theoretically play a cybered up mage but it'll make you an extremely weak mage and also worse at non-mage skills than characters who specialized instead of investing points into magic skills which become useless once you buy cyber implants.

 

[mondblut]

Worst of both worlds: Multi-classing. The shit aesthetics of classless with the obnoxious restrictions of classes.

Fool. Raping the living shit out of systems by stacking multiclasses is the greatest joy known to man.

 

[Gibson]

For party-based RPGs - classes. For single character RPGs - classless.

THIS

/thread.

 

[Tyranicon]

Worst of both worlds: Multi-classing. The shit aesthetics of classless with the obnoxious restrictions of classes.

Fool. Raping the living shit out of systems by stacking multiclasses is the greatest joy known to man.

You haven’t lived until you exploited the hell out of a system in ways the dev never intended.

 

[Desolate Dancer]

Classes.

 

[laclongquan]

A great example of Class system is Silent Storm, Silent Storm Sentinels, and Hammer & Sickle games.

There're 6 classes and a bunch of skill.

Each class can excel the most in ONE skill, ie having highest skill point level in them. Example, only medic can have 200 in Medicine, only Engineer have 200 in Engineering, only Sniper has 200 in Sniping skill etc... There are more than 6 skills obviously but you get the idea.

Skill level, behind efficiency in battle, also serve as preq condition to use item. You need 100 in Engineer to use the best explosive item like Hexogen, and 200 will increase its power exponentially. And normal characters have harder time to level up ENG skill than Engineer, so maybe at any time in your squad, other than the Engineers, you only have one non_ENG character with high skill. Maybe. So Engineer remain (almost) a must in any squad. Ditto with Medic.

If you make a compared design with Baldur's Gate 2, for example, it's like you can not use rest to heal your wound, need resources to replenish your spells, healing items best administered by your cleric (or barely work), wizard scroll only use by your wizards. THAT will crimp your easy-mode style!

 

[DraQ]

Divinity: Original Sin 1&2 is as fucking classless as it gets.
Arguably, anything where you can arbitrarily design your own class is classless as well, which would make all TES games but Arena classless.

Obviously, classless is the superior option as it allows you playing the character YOU want to play instead of devs making decisions for you, and, of course, any system that needs to be held up by wizards not having the right kind of hands for gripping a sword* (regardless of circumstances) deserves only scorn.

*

 

[Azarkon]

The real benefit of classes that isn't commonly mentioned in discussions is the flexibility it gives designers to create unique, coherent, and thematic mechanics packages.

Consider a simple example class like "Demon Sworn":

* At character creation, you choose a greater demon as your liege
* Each month, you must make a minimum of blood sacrifices to your liege corresponding to your level
* For each sacrifice, you gain points to spend on gifts from your liege - such as demonic abilities, followers, treasures, information, knowledge, etc.
* Occasionally, your liege may send you on a quest to advance its agenda
* At level 20, you gain the attention of a demon prince, who'll send you on an epic quest to defeat your liege and claim its place as a greater demon

How do you realize this in a skill-based system? The answer, more often than not, is you can't, because the core class mechanics aren't interchangeable. That is to say, you can replicate this as a "skill," but characters that choose this "skill" will basically be choosing a class. Thus, to implement it effectively in a skill-based system, you usually need to build an additional layer on top of the basic character system, which represents "class" even if you call it by another name. An example is Dungeon Crawl's deity system - where on top of basic skills, you have a choice of religion that determines the rest of your character and basically acts like a class.

My argument, then, is that actually, the choice is not either but both. You can't capture every aspect of a character - fantasy or otherwise - with skills, and neither is it possible to do with just class, though class is typically easier to work with since the idea of class customization via skill or talent options is, by now, well-established, while skill-based systems are often implemented by designers who are allergic to any mention of class in their games.

The bottom line is that skills and classes represent different features of a character, and that acting like they are mutually exclusive is an artificial flaw of the imagination. Skills measure proficiency. Classes determine concept.

 

[Falksi]

I like both, but there is something I fucking love about creating a class based character in the likes of BG2 etc.

I think having a class based system can draw you in more in some ways. Classless is better for expressing yourself, class based better for exploring yourself.

 

[biggestboss]

In practice, something like your Demon Liege example can be adapted into a classless system by rolling it up into Perks/Talents chosen at chargen or level up, although ideally it would be something less clunky for a single talent. It could also just be an involved quest chain where you meet a Demon Liege and sign a blood contract long after chargen.

A highdea I just had is that at chargen you could pick a Perk/Talent that says nothing other than “You naturally attract the attention of demons”. This means nothing to the player for several hours until in the middle of their playthrough during a resting period at the inn, they find themselves not in a dream but a nightmare world where they are offered something by said Demon Liege.

 

[Azarkon]

In practice, something like your Demon Liege example can be adapted into a classless system by rolling it up into Perks/Talents chosen at chargen or level up, although ideally it would be something less clunky for a single talent. It could also just be an involved quest chain where you meet a Demon Liege and sign a blood contract long after chargen.

A highdea I just had is that at chargen you could pick a Perk/Talent that says nothing other than “You naturally attract the attention of demons”. This means nothing to the player for several hours until in the middle of their playthrough during a resting period at the inn, they find themselves not in a dream but a nightmare world where they are offered something by said Demon Liege.

My ideal system is one that efficiently and flexibly blends the different layers that make up a character, rather than tries to fit them into boxes like skill-based, class-based, talent-based, etc.

So you start with Innate Attributes: race, stats, natural talents, etc.

You add onto that Learned Skills: martial proficiency, magic proficiency, crafts, social skills, etc.

And top it off with Functional Identity: profession, organization membership, special background, etc.

The three layers would be mutually reinforcing, and a character's overall abilities would be determined by all three. For instance, superior innate strength would allow for better use of martial proficiency; and stronger martial proficiency would improve performance in certain professions.

The benefit of such a system is that it allows you to decompose a character into its constituent parts in a sensible way, such that the most interesting aspects of the character - the functional identity, most of the time - are kept relatively open to creative license, yet does not heavily constrain the character's choice of basic competencies. Thus, if your functional identity is Demon Sworn, that doesn't limit you from approaching that profession from multiple directions - with a proficiency in swords and armor, or diplomacy and magic, or stealth and poison.

The only issue with the above system is balance - because almost everyone would want a powerful functional identity, and avoid generic ones. This is similar to how in Dungeon Crawl, not having a god or having a boring god is basically crippling your character both from a power perspective and from an enjoyment perspective. And of course, for a functional identity layer to function well, it must be flexible enough to encompass all sorts of variations and mixes of professions, organization memberships, etc., since characters can and do change their identity over the course of a life time. There's also the question of how you would deal with profession-specific skills and advancement. But that is a story for a different day.

 

[DraQ]

The real benefit of classes that isn't commonly mentioned in discussions is the flexibility it gives designers to create unique, coherent, and thematic mechanics packages.

Consider a simple example class like "Demon Sworn":

* At character creation, you choose a greater demon as your liege
* Each month, you must make a minimum of blood sacrifices to your liege corresponding to your level
* For each sacrifice, you gain points to spend on gifts from your liege - such as demonic abilities, followers, treasures, information, knowledge, etc.
* Occasionally, your liege may send you on a quest to advance its agenda
* At level 20, you gain the attention of a demon prince, who'll send you on an epic quest to defeat your liege and claim its place as a greater demon

How do you realize this in a skill-based system?

Simple. You use faction reputation mechanics and an optional quest(line). This way a character may become demon sworn also during gameplay, regardless of their starting class. Different characters in different circumstances may become differently incentivized too. It also allows for roleplaying and decisions just putting this in as a class does not.
Favours and pacts with third parties do *not* belong in one's class.

As for more typical thematic packages, authors can always provide some example ones and allow player to define their own using base mechanics. Think Daggerfall's chargen or enchanting system.

 

[Azarkon]

The real benefit of classes that isn't commonly mentioned in discussions is the flexibility it gives designers to create unique, coherent, and thematic mechanics packages.

Consider a simple example class like "Demon Sworn":

* At character creation, you choose a greater demon as your liege
* Each month, you must make a minimum of blood sacrifices to your liege corresponding to your level
* For each sacrifice, you gain points to spend on gifts from your liege - such as demonic abilities, followers, treasures, information, knowledge, etc.
* Occasionally, your liege may send you on a quest to advance its agenda
* At level 20, you gain the attention of a demon prince, who'll send you on an epic quest to defeat your liege and claim its place as a greater demon

How do you realize this in a skill-based system?

Simple. You use faction reputation mechanics and an optional quest(line). This way a character may become demon sworn also during gameplay, regardless of their starting class. Different characters in different circumstances may become differently incentivized too. It also allows for roleplaying and decisions just putting this in as a class does not.

While I generally like the idea of having the player choose their professions via a quest, depending on the game, it's not necessarily appropriate. For adventuring scenarios, it doesn't always make sense to define functional identity during the game. "A group of adventurers head north to defeat the giants" can't wait for members to pick their special vocations, and games with many and varied classes can't afford to have an initiation quest for each.

Favours and pacts with third parties do *not* belong in one's class.

Disagree. Demon Sworn is no different from the way Clerics work in most fantasy settings. Are Clerics not supposed to be a class? Classes are defined by their relationships with third parties all the time. This is one of the flexibilities class-based systems provide, which make a lot of sense when reproducing classic characters.

As for more typical thematic packages, authors can always provide some example ones and allow player to define their own using base mechanics. Think Daggerfall's chargen or enchanting system.

The more involved the mechanics, the harder they are to generalize. At some stage you come to the realization that to build a practical system where everything can be player defined, they might as well write code. The real problem with skill-based systems is that there aren't a concise set of common denominator skills that you can use to build all possible classes. The human imagination is not so easily reducible and even if it were, the end result will almost certainly be a programming language rather than a skill tree. Imagine fitting in archetypes like shapeshifter, dragon disciple, and psionicist all into the same skill-based system - they'd have practically no over laps, and each "skill" would effectively be a class.

 

[mondblut]

Also, classes allow you to sell a steady flow of splatbooks/DLCs and skills don't.